Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LordGood

===[COMMITTED]=== Spartan Structures

Recommended Posts

Good job with those builginds, they just look amazing. the rampant plants are a quite neat detail.

Someone already said that, but decoration shields on barracks wall would be really nice  to highlight its military purpose.

Farmstead fundation and visual actor have different shapes resulting in an unpleasing overlapping when built.

 

spartan-storehouse.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Do you plan to make archery range, stables, etc. for each civ? Even if not all civs need them, they'd still be good to have for mods or scenarios.

That's one thing I liked about AoK over AoE3. I never cared for the combined barracks. Separate buildings slows down some rushing as you can't train all the different types of units until you have built the respective buildings. It also lets you target enemy unit creation more precisely. For example, you can opt to destroy stables first to prevent cavalry creation if your current units are more vulnerable to cavalry. Plus, building variety makes cities look nicer.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WhiteTreePaladin said:

That's one thing I liked about AoK over AoE3. I never cared for the combined barracks. Separate buildings slows down some rushing as you can't train all the different types of units until you have built the respective buildings. It also lets you target enemy unit creation more precisely. For example, you can opt to destroy stables first to prevent cavalry creation if your current units are more vulnerable to cavalry. Plus, building variety makes cities look nicer.

Well, most civs in aoe3 (if not all) have separate buildings into barracks, stable and foundry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Zeta1127 said:

Separate Archery Range and Stables will help fix some of DarcReaver's lack of strategy and progression problems.

Not at all but is the starting. Combat still lack of fun.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, LordGood said:

iirc all civs have at least one unit in each category to warrant all 3 buildings, to not need to build one would throw off balance without another check. If a spartan player wants to build a stable and range just for cavalry skirms power to him lol

Honestly, I'd probably put the Spartan Helot skirm and Perioikoi skirm cav both in the Archery Range and skip the Stables for Sparta. The barracks would be skipped too, in favor of the Syssition. Unless you want to go something like this, and skip the "Royal Stoa" instead, which never made sense as a buildable structure to begin with:

Syssition:

  • Phase 1
    • Perioikoi Hoplite
  • Phase 2
    • Skiritai Commando
  • Phase 3
    • Spartiate Champion
    • Spartan Heroes

Archery Range:

  • Phase 1
    • Helot Skirmisher
  • Phase 2
    • Thureophoros Heavy Skirmisher

Cavalry Stables

  • Phase 1
    • Perioikoi Light Cavalry
  • Phase 2
    • Greek Allied Cavalry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would defer cavalry stables to phase 2, but I don't want different civs to have different paths to the same units. That's what makes balancing hell. The effectiveness and availability of different options once all the prerequisites are met are what are going to set these civs apart. In that spirit, it may be wise to add champion buildings. I never liked how certain civs got he ability to train champions from their barracks. Should that champion building stay the fortress? maybe. who knows.

this could also indirectly buff mercenaries if we decide not to have them follow these prereqs, have a civ spend a lot more money for the full experienced sleeve of troop types

I would like for stables and archery ranges to be prerequisites for ranged and cavalry champions respectively though. Requiring both a stable and range for ranged cavalry should put a good dent in the current camel-cavalry archer rush epidemic we have here now. This opens up a lot of options, I will do my best to capitalize on them as I move along, but I'm going to do so from a level playing field. That means making sure everyone has everything.

phase 2 champions seemed a bit messy to me, I think the stoa and town champions were added to counteract the earlier prevailing naked fanatic rushes, but i dont know

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, WhiteTreePaladin said:

Ah, that's true. The barracks and archery range was what was combined.

The archery range was declined by range-melee combat of gun power, units like musketeer is probe of this.

large_orig_musketeer_4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LordGood said:

I would defer cavalry stables to phase 2

Right, I forgot.

So, for Spartans:
 

Syssition:

  • Phase 1
    • Perioikoi Hoplite
  • Phase 2
    • Skiritai Commando
  • Phase 3
    • Spartiate Champion
    • Spartan Heroes

Archery Range:

  • Phase 1
    • Helot Skirmisher
  • Phase 2
    • Thureophoros Heavy Skirmisher

Cavalry Stables

  • Phase 2
    • Perioikoi Light Cavalry
    • Greek Allied Cavalry

I guess my real point is that some civs won't need all of the military buildings

 

2 hours ago, LordGood said:

phase 2 champions seemed a bit messy to me, I think the stoa and town champions were added to counteract the earlier prevailing naked fanatic rushes, but i dont know

Yes, I hate this. As you say, it's a mess. There were other ways to nerfing the NF rush. Better to use a Stoa much like how DE uses stoas. If you want to add extra champs and extraneous units like Thracian Black Cloaks, et al., then you can now add them to the stables, barracks, ranges respectively, either as Phase 3 options or unlock them with a special tech. 

 

2 hours ago, LordGood said:

I never liked how certain civs got he ability to train champions from their barracks.

In DE, I instead made this a special ability for 1 civ after 'Upgrading' individual barracks to Royal Barracks, see: Macedonians. Removed it from all others.

 

2 hours ago, LordGood said:

I would like for stables and archery ranges to be prerequisites for ranged and cavalry champions respectively though. Requiring both a stable and range for ranged cavalry should put a good dent in the current camel-cavalry archer rush epidemic we have here now.

This sounds interesting. I imagine an auto-research tech that looks for each of the required buildings. The ranged cavalry are then unlocked by that tech. That would be the way to do it without adding any new code. The other way would be player.xml.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LordGood said:

I would defer cavalry stables to phase 2, but I don't want different civs to have different paths to the same units. That's what makes balancing hell. The effectiveness and availability of different options once all the prerequisites are met are what are going to set these civs apart. In that spirit, it may be wise to add champion buildings. I never liked how certain civs got he ability to train champions from their barracks. Should that champion building stay the fortress? maybe. who knows.

this could also indirectly buff mercenaries if we decide not to have them follow these prereqs, have a civ spend a lot more money for the full experienced sleeve of troop types

I would like for stables and archery ranges to be prerequisites for ranged and cavalry champions respectively though. Requiring both a stable and range for ranged cavalry should put a good dent in the current camel-cavalry archer rush epidemic we have here now.
 

From an abstract point of view,

Infantry factory Lvl 1, Vehicle factory Lvl1

Infantry factory Lvl2, Vehicle factory Lvl2

is a good schema.

edit: (by lvl1: I mean standard units, by lvl2: I mean super units, in a non 0ad related way)

Stables and barracks fits well. But as you point out the range doesn't fit very well (for ranged cavalry). I don't know where you would train those ones. Btw Range is for archers or all ranged units?

edit: I didn't see wow n-5 post

Advanced buildings for champion units.

 

 

Quote

This opens up a lot of options.

Yes!
 

Quote

 

I will do my best to capitalize on them as I move along, but I'm going to do so from a level playing field. That means making sure everyone has everything.

 

I (We) trust you! anyway alpha (while it's consistent with the global thing and maintainable).

Quote

phase 2 champions seemed a bit messy to me,

Agree. (The Stoa thing is inaccurate and messy :/)

Quote

 

I think the stoa and town champions were added to counteract the earlier prevailing naked fanatic rushes, but i dont know

They wasn't added for that. (It was the converse in fact)

r18024 for stoa thing

r18055 for fanatics

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking it would serve as both a prereq building for ranged cavalry and towers, an archer tech building, and a training building for foot archers (slingers and javelinists too) That would warrant building multiple so it is visually apparent to scouts what units a town is geared to respond with if attacked.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can be nice upgrade buildings those produces units.

Not all civilizations are same.

Romans don't need this.

Persians and Greeks does

Carthage and Successors have more needs. Seleucids have a bigger rooster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LordGood said:

I was thinking it would serve as both a prereq building for ranged cavalry and towers, an archer tech building, and a training building for foot archers (slingers and javelinists too) That would warrant building multiple so it is visually apparent to scouts what units a town is geared to respond with if attacked.

That sounds like a good idea (y)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be aware that some (if not most) of these changes would require changes in the ai (like a prereq for cav or towers, or removing ranged or cav units from barracks), and i would not want 0ad to neglect SP games. So as long as there are not more people working on the ai, that won't work.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LordGood said:

These templates are dormant for the time being, we can coordinate that later.

Sure,   they are fine (and the new models are really great :) ). That was just a warning as i see some people getting exited, with sentences like "That would be the way to do it without adding any new code".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's been pointed out an uncomfortable amount of times that there are some core issues with 0AD... As a one man army, LordGood is going a long way mediating this, including elemental aspects of a fun game of this type: building variety and logical options/choices tied to those buildings like techs and units. Lack of building diversity takes away the fun in a game longer than 20min. Adding as much as 3 new (functional) building types per civ is awesome! coders should try to keep up with this man, because he clearly has vision, and his work leaves a very noticeable impression on the game..

For example, I saw Nescio and Leper working on a way to be able to display more building slots in the GUI over here, which already solves one potential problem. I know the AI is a different beast altogether, but LordGood's and Stanislas69's progress in the modelling department merits the attention from coders. This can be a nice communal project. Has anybody asked @Alexandermb wether he's interested in contributing models for this project? Three people working on it at the same time is sure to speed up the process considerably.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which units are trainable at which structures can be decided at a later stage. Creating new art for structures is far more important (and you're doing a great job); even if not all buildings end up being used in the main game, it doesn't hurt to create more visual actors than strictly necessary (they could be useful in campaigns, mods, or future changes).

Ideally I'd like to see the following structure visual actors for all factions:

  • economic dock
  • military shipyard
  • siege workshop
  • barracks
  • archery range
  • cavalry stables
  • chariot stables
  • camel stables
  • elephant stables
  • dog kennels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

barracks may upgrade into a specialized building in order to train champions instead of citizen soldiers for a fair amount of metal and stone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...